RB- The running backs are the strongest group on A&M's team. On the other hand, the Aggie receivers are the most enigmatic. After losing three starting receivers and plenty of quality backups, A&M will ask a lot out of many fresh faces next season.
OL- The biggest surprise here should be Erik McCoy's switch to left guard. That is something A&M's experimented with all spring, and it is a position more suitable for the sophomore who struggled with snapping last season. Keaton Sutherland receives the least confidence in becoming a starter, but his experience separates himself from other potential candidates.
TE- Lastly, don't expect A&M to use its tight ends next season. Kalvin Cline was active in the spring game, but that was a narrative some ran with last year as well. Aggie fans need to be in believe-it-when-I-see-it mode when it comes to tight end usage.
Defense
LDE- Qualen Cunningham, David Darley
DT- Kingsley Keke, Daylon Mack
DT- Zaycoven Henderson, Justin Madubuike
RDE- Jarrett Johnson, Landis Durham
MLB- Otaro Alaka, Tyrel Dodson
SLB- Richard Moore, Justin Dunning
WLB- Anthony Hines, Dwaine Thomas
NB- Donovan Wilson, Ikenna Okeke
FS- Armani Watts, Keldrick Carper
SS- Larry Pryor, Donovan Wilson
LCB- Charles Oliver, Nick Harvey
RCB- Priest Willis, Deshawn Capers-Smith
DL- The defensive line unit is a tale of two stories. The tackles are full of experience, depth and talent. The defensive ends, however, lack depth and skill. With Tyree Johnson, Micheal Clemons and Ondario Robinson in the mix this summer, the two-deep chart will look much different. But they still won't fix the overarching problem.

LB- The departure of Shaan Washington and A&M's nagging issue against the run must be fixed this season. This new linebacker group possesses a nice combination of experience and talented potential. But if Anthony Hines doesn't live up to expectations, which are very high, A&M could struggle in the linebacker department.
DB- While the running backs highlight an offense full of questions, the A&M safeties similarly represent the best group on the other side of the ball. The play of Larry Pryor in 2017 will determine if this unit is elite. Pryor has giant shoes to fill, as Justin Evans perhaps impacted this defense the greatest last season.
Special teams
PLK- Daniel LaCamera
P- Shane Tripucka, Braden Mann
ST- Shane Tripucka quietly pieced together a phenomenal 2016 season. Daniel LaCamera struggled, going 17-for-24 in field goals on the year. With Jeff Banks at the helm, the Aggie special teams should be the least of people's worries.

Keaton Sutherland receives the least confidence in becoming a starter, but his experience separates himself from other potential candidates.

This is idiotic. Multiple sources close to the program said Keaton was (1) the best overall athlete on our OL and most improved (which shouldn't be a surprise since he has missed parts of his two prior seasons at Aggieland and all of last spring's practice either from injury or recovering from injury.

Finding the right receiver spot to list Hansford is tough -- but it won't be as a back-up to Ratley.

The OL transfer from ou will be the primary backup at either one or both of the OT positions.

TE should be an OR listing. Schrop is the better blocker likely getting more snaps on likely running downs; Cline the better receiver and more likely to be on the field when we're in a passing situations.

Darley at backup DE is a joke. Clemmons will be the likely backup there.

The starting LBers, in my opinion, will be Alaka, Dodson and Hines. The primary backups will be Santino, Buddy, Thomas, Moore and White (in no particular order). Our quality will be much deeper than at any point since Sumlin's first year .... the problem is that -- except for Alaka and Moore, it will be very inexperienced.

Capers-Smith is not a corner -- but a nickel (if you have any doubt, go back and re-watch last year's game against Mississippi State).

I don't get you obsession with this. Until he is off the team he is on it. He was cleared by a University Investigation (completely separate from the AD). Sumlin's hands are tied until the courts have their say.

I don't get you obsession with this. Until he is off the team he is on it. He was cleared by a University Investigation (completely separate from the AD). Sumlin's hands are tied until the courts have their say.

Odds are he won't be here in the fall.

Why are Sumlin's hands tied? I've never heard of a HC who didn't have the final say on if a kid would be on a team or not...

I'm not a lawyer, but I have worked with them closely over a period spanning more than four decades. So, during that time, I learned to listen and observe.

It "could" be the equivalent of wrongful termination. Based on reason (or lack thereof) for pulling the scholarship. Based on inconsistency with past precedent in how other similar (not identical, but similar) cases have been handled.

Not to mention that it could be a part of our basic DNA that says we treat all people fairly and justly and do not convict/dismiss people based on how the winds of public opinion and rush to judgment without having fully vetted the situation.

Not to mention that it could be a part of our basic DNA for most of us that says we treat all people fairly and justly and do not convict/dismiss people based on how the winds of public opinion and rush to judgment without having fully vetted the situation.

Does anyone know if A&M offers five "one year" scholarships, or one "five year" scholarship?

My understanding that it was always a series of one year deals, but in this latest recruiting season, I know that USC is telling recruits that they will continue to have a scholarship whether or not they stay on the team. I'm not sure if that's just a private school thing, or a PAC-12 thing or what._________________You can only make a mistake once. If it happens again, it's a choice.

My understanding is that the scholarship is a year to year situation in its most legal and technical sense.

However: that said, there is a strong, implied imperative that if the student athlete does what he needs to do:
Maintain academic eligibility
Demonstrate good citizenship
Do those things that need to be done to be a part of the team (comply with practice, S&C, off-season work, etc.)

That there would be no "trap dooring" as was frequently done by our neighbors to the west -- and that the scholarship would be honored for the student-athlete's entire eligibility.

That does not mean that there isn't ongoing dialogue between coach and player involving candid assessment of how the player is performing/progressing relative to the overall roster and how that plays out in terms of their relative rank in the roster/playing pecking order.

If that information and assessment is not something with which the player agrees or is willing to accept, then the opportunity to "vote themselves off the island" is always available to them.

But, bottom line, we as a school have made a commitment to the young man ... and we will not "trap door" them down the road if they continue to uphold their end of the bargain.

The A&M disciplinary proceedings were very thorough and the first panel found Kirk not responsible of violating the A&M rules that he was accused of violating; rules that are functionally the equivalent of the Class B misdemeanor with which he is presently facing in the Court system. The crux of the matter is that in the A&M disciplinary proceedings, the evidence of any sexually exploitative intent was not there. Both of the alleged victims testified in the initial proceedings.

We are surprised that the alleged victims says that they are outraged at Texas A&M. The University officials were very thorough to the point that we began to wonder if Kirk would be treated even-handedly. The first panel made its decision, and the complainants were not happy with the results.

What is additionally surprising about the fact that the women say that they are outraged is that in those proceedings, they had more rights than alleged victims do in criminal cases where a defendant is acquitted. A&M's procedures allow victims to appeal a result. Both complaining witnesses did.

As a result of the appeal of the first A&M disciplinary proceedings, Kirk had to face a second disciplinary proceeding where he was accused of violating University rules that were the functionally equivalent of Disorderly Conduct (a Class C misdemeanor) which did not require proof of any intent to gratify. He was found responsible in that proceeding.

In the second A&M proceeding, given the nature of the new charge, the two women did not have a right to participate in the proceedings. Kirk waived his rights under FERPA and allowed the women to hear the proceedings for two reasons. He did so as a conciliatory gesture and so that he could actually apologize to them for offending them (he was prohibited from communicating with them, otherwise).

Kirk's apology was sincere. If they choose not to forgive him, there is nothing else that he can do about it. They seem now to be advancing a cause instead of seeking justice in an individual case.

I don't get you obsession with this. Until he is off the team he is on it. He was cleared by a University Investigation (completely separate from the AD). Sumlin's hands are tied until the courts have their say.

Odds are he won't be here in the fall.

First of all, Aggies don't lie, cheat or steal, and we don't tolerate those that do.

Your last sentence tells me that you know he is lying about the moronic jock itch excuse, just like everyone who has any common sense.

The likelihood of a conviction in this case is extremely high, especially since both he and his attorney have admitted to him committing indecent exposure.

Those of us with kids look at databases with sexual offenders to see where they are located. We do not take these things lightly.

To have such a player still on our football team and cleared by our school does not reflect well on us Aggies. It's not as bad as Baylor but it's still bad._________________Keep calm
and
Gig 'em

I don't get you obsession with this. Until he is off the team he is on it. He was cleared by a University Investigation (completely separate from the AD). Sumlin's hands are tied until the courts have their say.

Odds are he won't be here in the fall.

Why are Sumlin's hands tied? I've never heard of a HC who didn't have the final say on if a kid would be on a team or not...

Exactly.

Does anyone think Young or Woodard would terminate Sumlin for not allowing a guy like this on his team?

On the contrary, stuff like this could weigh on the minds of those on the Board of Regents after the season. Something like this could tip the scales for those sitting on the fence to decide to cut bait after the season.

And to hide behind some secret school committee and its asinine decision just looks weak, much the same way that allowing Kevin Murray to influence his decision to play Kyler._________________Keep calm
and
Gig 'em

I don't get you obsession with this. Until he is off the team he is on it. He was cleared by a University Investigation (completely separate from the AD). Sumlin's hands are tied until the courts have their say.

Odds are he won't be here in the fall.

First of all, Aggies don't lie, cheat or steal, and we don't tolerate those that do.

Your last sentence tells me that you know he is lying about the moronic jock itch excuse, just like everyone who has any common sense.

The likelihood of a conviction in this case is extremely high, especially since both he and his attorney have admitted to him committing indecent exposure.

Those of us with kids look at databases with sexual offenders to see where they are located. We do not take these things lightly.

To have such a player still on our football team and cleared by our school does not reflect well on us Aggies. It's not as bad as Baylor but it's still bad.

And what you just said is based on your emotion. You obviously have convicted him in your mind and your decision is final. However, we live in a society of due process. You are allowing your emotions to cloud your objectivity. You have already convicted him of lying and being a sexual predator. And if one of the girls were my daughter I may feel the same way. However, the fact is this has to go to court. And the fact remains that none of us knows exactly what intent was in merritts mind, no matter how absurd his excuse is or how emotional we become.

And I am not defending merritt. But I am not fond of mob justice either.

This decision is too important for everyone involved for there to be a rush to final judgment without due process and having all the facts.

As much as we all find the matter inappropriate as it's been cast in media reports to this point, ask yourself these simple questions:

Are you aware of a case where a person has been falsely accused -- whether by one or multiple others?

Do we have a process -- as a nation which values the rule of law -- where charges can be brought and given full, appropriate consideration before punishment is imposed ... thus protecting the rights of the aggrieved and the accused?

Is it appropriate for end-game punishment (i.e, not suspension but dismissal) to be levied before all individuals are afforded due process?

I wonder whether those unwilling to withhold end-game punishment at the front end of the process would be willing to accept similar judgment and punishment if they somehow found themselves in a situation where due process was disregarded.

Here I go repeating myself: IF the young man is found/proven guilty after due process is afforded, then let a swift and appropriate penalty be imposed.

But we have a process to accommodate both parties in these situations -- to ensure that punishment is meted out if the finding is for the aggrieved party ... or that reduced or dismissed charges are the end result if the party of the second part is found to be inappropriately or unjustly charged.